User talk:Accounting4Taste/archive3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive box
Hey I've seen one of those elsewhere! Gwen Gale (talk) 02:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Bill Mack’s Ice Cream Parlor article deletion
My article on Bill Mack’s Ice Cream Parlor was not blatant (or even covert for that matter) advertising. It lacked all of the characteristics of an advertisement: marketing language, a specific store location, discernible bias of any kind, etc. Bill Mack’s Ice Cream Parlor is an oft-discussed place of business in my community and deserves the fair and balanced article I plan to give it. Mmike88 (talk) 03:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
RfA thank you spam
Hi there - thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed 69/10/3 yesterday. I will put the tools to good use and hopefully justify the confidence you had in me. Best wishes Fritzpoll (talk) 11:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
MyStockFund article deletion
Hi there - I did my best to provide an article on MyStockFund that described the company and ommited any type of advertising. It would be a great if I could modify the article so that it would eliminate any of the information that didn't pass the standards, as I did my best to keep any details including rates etc of the services off the article. Please advise fantonel (talk) 09:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to reply on your talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
This is referring to the article on Akaza Research Thank you for the suggestion, I will rephrase the article. I am an intern at Akaza, but I agree that the article needs to be changed. I will rewrite it right now.
Speedy Barnstar
|
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
| For all your diligence with New Page Patrolling! Marasmusine (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
BRC & privacy concerns
A4T, would you mind dropping in your opinion here? Thanks. GlassCobra 01:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Wali Mohammad Khan
I was traveling and just found this page deleted. This person has notablity for Pakistan, his marriage brings together political dyansties of 3 of 4 Pakistani Provinces.
Reference to him can also be found on the following page in Wikepedia. Additionally he is the Father in Law of a Former President, Father and Grandfather of Federal Ministers.
Would appreciate if you can restore it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftab_Ahmad_Khan_Sherpao
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wali_Mohammad_Khan" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laiquerehman (talk • contribs) 01:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Active Myofascial Therapy
The Active Myofascial Therapy page was deleted a while back. I rewrote it and put it up with my references and such and altered the tone of the article such that it would be coming from an unbias voice. I resubmitted it and it was deleted again. :( I am new to Wiki writing and would like to have this therapy listed here. Like I mentioned before other techniques are on wiki and they read similar to mine. Where does the problem lie. I would like to fix and put something up. Please let me know what I need to do to change it. Thanks --Invigor1841 (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Wali Mohammad Khan
I was traveling and just found this page deleted. This person has notablity for Pakistan, his marriage brings together political dyansties of 3 of 4 Pakistani Provinces.
Reference to him can also be found on the following page in Wikepedia. Additionally he is the Father in Law of a Former President, Father and Grandfather of Federal Ministers.
Would appreciate if you can restore it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftab_Ahmad_Khan_Sherpao
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wali_Mohammad_Khan" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laiquerehman (talk • contribs) 01:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Active Myofascial Therapy
The Active Myofascial Therapy page was deleted a while back. I rewrote it and put it up with my references and such and altered the tone of the article such that it would be coming from an unbias voice. I resubmitted it and it was deleted again. :( I am new to Wiki writing and would like to have this therapy listed here. Like I mentioned before other techniques are on wiki and they read similar to mine. Where does the problem lie. I would like to fix and put something up. Please let me know what I need to do to change it. Thanks --Invigor1841 (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Regarding my article for the "HeatShift Technology"
Dear Accounting4Taste,
Hi. I am contacting you regarding my article for the "HeatShift Technology". I saw that you had removed the HeatShift Technology page and I was wondering what I can do to hopefully get the page back and fix the article. I know you put the remark as a "blatant advertising" but I assure you it is not. Maybe it was the way I structured the article or maybe it is due to some of the wording. I truly apologize if it seems as though it is "blatant advertising". But the technology is so new that I really tried to explain the article in a way that least sounds like an advertisement. The technology is really a new way to cool and I believe the article teaches how this new cooling function works. Similar to the concept of the "USB Technology", when that product came out, it is very hard to explain how the technology worked without it seeming to be an 'advertisement'. With our technology, I really hope you can give me a chance to best explain this new way of cooling and hopefully be able to contribute this new method in Wikipedia. This new method of cooling is definitely first of all very 'new' but it is definitely an new way to cool objects that the general public should really know about. If possible, may I know how I can change the article so that we can resolve this issue.
I know you probably get hundreds of these letters like mine and I truly appreciate your time in reading this letter.
Thank you,
WayneWaynewang45 (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Waynewang45 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- Why not try to contribute a paragraph to Heat exchanger without mentioning the name, website, etc., of the company? If it's the METHOD that you're anxious to communicate, that would seem to be the way to do it, by clustering it with a bunch of other methods that do the same thing. I'm not sufficiently versed in engineering matters to know whether that will work or not, but trying to create a separate article, based on what I see, is just about impossible -- unless you can find lots of independent expert third-party arm's-length opinion that verifies that the process is notable in a verifiable way, and manage to write the article without referring to the company that owns the process. My recommendation would be to also try to create that paragraph without using your proprietary name for the process -- see if there's an abstract way that you can describe the process in a phrase, like "gel-based heat exchange". I hope this helps; doubtless the people who work on Heat exchanger will be able to discuss this with your further in greater detail. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of Beer Blow Proposed
You put as one reason: "Wikipedia is not for stuff your frat made up last weekend". Try again; do a Google search for Beer Blow and the first page of results will have about half a dozen links to rules pages. This game is by no means new, and by no means my personal creation or the creation of any group I am affiliated with. I will include as many of those sites as are not blacklisted as references if you so desire to satisfy your first reason. As far as being notable, the fact that it is on so many party game sites indicates that the game is popular enough to be notable, but if you're looking for pop culture references I have to say I've never seen it referenced in movies or media.
I would appreciate you removing the delete tag at your earliest convenience, please. Liko81 (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- You wrote: Thanks for your note. Feel free to remove the tag yourself, especially if you can provide anything like a reliable source to bolster your assertions, but you should be advised that I'll immediately submit the article for an Articles for deletion process; I share neither your enthusiasm for nor your conviction as to the breadth of usage and notability of this game. If I can be of any assistance with Wikipedia policies, please leave me a note at your convenience. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Liko81" -- Your enthusiasm isn't really my concern, or anyone's; I could probably find a thousand pages in this site whose subject matter interests less than 1% of visitors, and would not interest you or I in the slightest. You have a valid point for notability; I will look for articles other than rules pages that provide evidence as to its popularity, however by the guidelines of the notability page I am not required to prove it is popular, important or famous, only that many independent sources cover it. I can throw the several dozen instances of these rules in the article if that will convince you, but as they are as repetitive as an AP newswire I would prefer not to clutter the article with twenty references to two paragraphs. So yes, I think I would prefer your guidance as to how to get you off this article's back when there is little evidence any other drinking game chronicled here received the same scrutiny.Liko81 (talk) 20:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- Liko81, please see WP:WAX. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Wali Mohammad Khan
I was traveling and just found this page deleted. This person has notablity for Pakistan, his marriage brings together political dyansties of 3 of 4 Pakistani Provinces.
Reference to him can also be found on the following page in Wikepedia. Additionally he is the Father in Law of a Former President, Father and Grandfather of Federal Ministers.
Would appreciate if you can restore it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftab_Ahmad_Khan_Sherpao
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wali_Mohammad_Khan" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laiquerehman (talk • contribs) 01:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Active Myofascial Therapy
The Active Myofascial Therapy page was deleted a while back. I rewrote it and put it up with my references and such and altered the tone of the article such that it would be coming from an unbias voice. I resubmitted it and it was deleted again. :( I am new to Wiki writing and would like to have this therapy listed here. Like I mentioned before other techniques are on wiki and they read similar to mine. Where does the problem lie. I would like to fix and put something up. Please let me know what I need to do to change it. Thanks --Invigor1841 (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Regarding my article for the "HeatShift Technology"
Dear Accounting4Taste,
Hi. I am contacting you regarding my article for the "HeatShift Technology". I saw that you had removed the HeatShift Technology page and I was wondering what I can do to hopefully get the page back and fix the article. I know you put the remark as a "blatant advertising" but I assure you it is not. Maybe it was the way I structured the article or maybe it is due to some of the wording. I truly apologize if it seems as though it is "blatant advertising". But the technology is so new that I really tried to explain the article in a way that least sounds like an advertisement. The technology is really a new way to cool and I believe the article teaches how this new cooling function works. Similar to the concept of the "USB Technology", when that product came out, it is very hard to explain how the technology worked without it seeming to be an 'advertisement'. With our technology, I really hope you can give me a chance to best explain this new way of cooling and hopefully be able to contribute this new method in Wikipedia. This new method of cooling is definitely first of all very 'new' but it is definitely an new way to cool objects that the general public should really know about. If possible, may I know how I can change the article so that we can resolve this issue.
I know you probably get hundreds of these letters like mine and I truly appreciate your time in reading this letter.
Thank you,
WayneWaynewang45 (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Waynewang45 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- Why not try to contribute a paragraph to Heat exchanger without mentioning the name, website, etc., of the company? If it's the METHOD that you're anxious to communicate, that would seem to be the way to do it, by clustering it with a bunch of other methods that do the same thing. I'm not sufficiently versed in engineering matters to know whether that will work or not, but trying to create a separate article, based on what I see, is just about impossible -- unless you can find lots of independent expert third-party arm's-length opinion that verifies that the process is notable in a verifiable way, and manage to write the article without referring to the company that owns the process. My recommendation would be to also try to create that paragraph without using your proprietary name for the process -- see if there's an abstract way that you can describe the process in a phrase, like "gel-based heat exchange". I hope this helps; doubtless the people who work on Heat exchanger will be able to discuss this with your further in greater detail. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of Beer Blow Proposed
You put as one reason: "Wikipedia is not for stuff your frat made up last weekend". Try again; do a Google search for Beer Blow and the first page of results will have about half a dozen links to rules pages. This game is by no means new, and by no means my personal creation or the creation of any group I am affiliated with. I will include as many of those sites as are not blacklisted as references if you so desire to satisfy your first reason. As far as being notable, the fact that it is on so many party game sites indicates that the game is popular enough to be notable, but if you're looking for pop culture references I have to say I've never seen it referenced in movies or media.
I would appreciate you removing the delete tag at your earliest convenience, please. Liko81 (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- You wrote: Thanks for your note. Feel free to remove the tag yourself, especially if you can provide anything like a reliable source to bolster your assertions, but you should be advised that I'll immediately submit the article for an Articles for deletion process; I share neither your enthusiasm for nor your conviction as to the breadth of usage and notability of this game. If I can be of any assistance with Wikipedia policies, please leave me a note at your convenience. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Liko81" -- Your enthusiasm isn't really my concern, or anyone's; I could probably find a thousand pages in this site whose subject matter interests less than 1% of visitors, and would not interest you or I in the slightest. You have a valid point for notability; I will look for articles other than rules pages that provide evidence as to its popularity, however by the guidelines of the notability page I am not required to prove it is popular, important or famous, only that many independent sources cover it. I can throw the several dozen instances of these rules in the article if that will convince you, but as they are as repetitive as an AP newswire I would prefer not to clutter the article with twenty references to two paragraphs. So yes, I think I would prefer your guidance as to how to get you off this article's back when there is little evidence any other drinking game chronicled here received the same scrutiny.Liko81 (talk) 20:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- Liko81, please see WP:WAX. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
Could you please Speedily delete the above article as its an album by an artist who was just speedily deleted for being unnotable. [1] --Bit Lordy (talk) 12:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- You are welcome--Bit Lordy (talk) 23:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sorry to be slow in responding to your excellent question.
I've left a partial response on my talk page and then got interrupted. I'll try to write more in the next day or two.
Thanks for your help with spam!! --A. B. (talk • contribs) 13:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
For deleting my 'implausible' title! --Regents Park (roll amongst the roses) 16:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 17:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
He is not and was never an NFL player. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sforman71 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
article deleted on Rebecca W. Keller
I would like to request that the article on Rebecca W. Keller be placed in a sandbox for further additions to be made. From what I am reading, I need to provide more References/sources showing that her publishing company is well beyond a "self-publisher" status. I know that the books are used in some school systems and that several articles have been published about Dr. Keller and the curriculum. I had looked at Wiki articles such as that for home school author Mary Pride -- and the difference I see is that she uses several outside references in her footnotes. So I will add more such references. I am not sure where the "non-neutrality" comes in but I'll see if I can improve that as well. Will I be able to see easily how to get to the article in the sand box? Thanks, Writerms (talk) 23:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)writerms
Cookie Cutter Series
Don't deny it you know many fantasy novel series' titles follow a similar plot pattern
Look at Pokemon every episode is exactly the same.
Fair enough i dont source any references. Doesn't wikipedia have a way to develop new articles though? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdt2ewt (talk • contribs) 18:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Quick question
Hi. Can you let me know what content was at Christianity/to do? Thanks SP-KP (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. The page I'm interested in is the one that used to appear in the To Do box on the Talk Page - I've just not-quite-recreated it (i.e. opened an edit session for it without saving) as an experiment and it seems like I should have asked about Talk:Christianity/to do. Thanks for letting me know about that. Would you have any objection to restoring it (i.e. the Talk page only, not it's associated article-space page?) SP-KP (talk) 16:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted the restored talk page to the last good version - I'm happy with things, and don't need you to do any more work on this. Many thanks for your help. SP-KP (talk) 17:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for that observation - I think we're safe as "to do" pages are a fairly widely-used convention and they don't usually have an article space page (see e.g. Talk:Bird/to do, Talk:Berlin/to do SP-KP (talk) 17:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
5 card majors
Thanks for your observations and advise. I made the move you suggested, and added the first reference. Feel free to add others as you wish. Thanks, mbbradford 19:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again for your kind remarks. With so much bridge information on wk, I was surprised that there was no 5cm article. Perhaps it is just too well known. I'm sure there are better references, and I'll got to them someday. mbbradford 06:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey
hey, recently you deleted my article for klikradio. I was not finished writing it and the organization itself has already been in the local paper. Maybe allowing me to finish it in a sand-box would be easier until I finished.
Thanks, Phillip Ross and Don Park —Preceding unsigned comment added by StarD (talk • contribs) 22:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'll reply on your talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Speed eating
Answered your messsage on my Talkpage Channel ® 23:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
We have consensus at Barack Obama
... for certain details regarding William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko. See Talk:Barack Obama. However, a small but extremely active and dedicated group Obama fanboys are trying to WP:OWN and sanitize the article. Anyone who tries to support WP:NPOV and revert to the consensus version is threatened, called a sockpuppeteer, etc.
First, this has been an ugly situation for some time and more attention from admins is needed. Second, the Obama fanboys need to be brought under control. They do not own the article. WP:NPOV means proportionate representation of all significant POVs. The POV that is questioning Obama about his relationships with Wright, Rezko and Ayers is not a fringe POV. Editors who seek to include that POV in a balanced manner are not "Obama haters," and when they agree with one another, they are not sockpuppets. Please help. Kossack4Truth (talk) 21:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Bizstar
I have used the services of Bizstar and as a small business in the UK i found it very useful and feel that many similar business's could benefit from it the way i have, if you check out the site you will see all the features, i can be called at JMB Block Managment 0844 586 3252 if you wish to discuss with me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.145.108 (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
We have consensus at Barack Obama
... for certain details regarding William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko. See Talk:Barack Obama. However, a small but extremely active and dedicated group Obama fanboys are trying to WP:OWN and sanitize the article. Anyone who tries to support WP:NPOV and revert to the consensus version is threatened, called a sockpuppeteer, etc.
First, this has been an ugly situation for some time and more attention from admins is needed. Second, the Obama fanboys need to be brought under control. They do not own the article. WP:NPOV means proportionate representation of all significant POVs. The POV that is questioning Obama about his relationships with Wright, Rezko and Ayers is not a fringe POV. Editors who seek to include that POV in a balanced manner are not "Obama haters," and when they agree with one another, they are not sockpuppets. Please help. Kossack4Truth (talk) 21:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Bizstar
I have used the services of Bizstar and as a small business in the UK i found it very useful and feel that many similar business's could benefit from it the way i have, if you check out the site you will see all the features, i can be called at JMB Block Managment 0844 586 3252 if you wish to discuss with me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.145.108 (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Courtesy Notification regarding my recall criteria
Hiya. Just a courtesy note to say I've named you as one of the editors that I would accept a request for recall from. There's nothing onerous about it, and you don't have to do anything. It's simply to let you know that as I have added myself to CAT:AOR I needed some unfussed criteria for recall, and I believe your judgement fits that criteria neatly. Thanks! Pedro : Chat 10:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Regarding The Money Masters
I saw that you deleted the page for the documentary The Money Masters. You may go sour just from seeing the subject of this post, but this is not entirely about the film itself. Rather it's Wikipedia's guidelines on notability that I would like to discuss -- and you seem to be a good person to discuss this with.
The Money Masters was deleted for lack of notability. Well, maybe it does lack notability if we are to very strictly go by Wikipedia's guidelines. I'm sure however that there are thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of articles in Wikipedia, with considerably less notability than this. I guess that's not a very firm argument however. One could similarly argue that there are tens of thousands of articles with errors, typos and factual errors, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't correct these errors as we strive to improve Wikipedia.
All right, well we have another problem with this. The Money Masters is a highly controversial movie, containing highly questionable content. For instance, in one section it relates of the banker Nathan Mayer Rothschild who after the battle of Waterloo is supposed to have carried through a major scheme of fraud in order to gain control of the Bank of England with the help of a trusted agent of his, Rothworth. A search on Rothschild and Rothworth on google will give you hits on hundreds of anti-semitic and other extremely dodgy sites. My guess is that a lot of things in this movie are very, not to say severely, dubious when you look into them. So, while the documentary goes viral on the internet (getting some 60,000 hits in a refined search), there is no place where the film's contents may be seriously refuted or affirmed as it could on Wikipedia. And so the film will keep on spreading on the internet unqustioned.
I think that it is important that this type of film is brought into the light and should not be allowed to continue to linger in the dark where it may feed the minds of anti-semites and neo-nazis. It is a pity that Wikipedia's guidelines are too rigid to allow such a thing to be discussed here. Is it reasonable that a film that gets 60,000 hits on google should not be held as notable even if no "reliable" sources refer to it? And even if it is grouped with conspiracy theories and perhaps even more awful things, isn't the best thing to bring it into the light?
I would like to note that the film does have at least some valid points: the film's over-all focus, the concept of fractional reserve banking, its roots and its endemism to the current shape of the global economy, should be openly discussed more. More importantly, this movie is not explicitly anti-semitic or racist. Still, stray accounts in it may lend itself to such and to other purposes.
I would really appreciate to hear your views on this.